We study partisan differences in Americans' response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Political leaders and media outlets on the right and left have sent divergent messages about the severity of the crisis, which could impact the extent to which Republicans and Democrats engage in social distancing and other efforts to reduce disease transmission. We develop a simple model of a pandemic response with heterogeneous agents that clarifies the causes and consequences of heterogeneous responses. We use location data from a large sample of smartphones to show that areas with more Republicans engaged in less social distancing, controlling for other factors including public policies, population density, and local COVID cases and deaths. We then present new survey evidence of significant gaps at the individual level between Republicans and Democrats in self-reported social distancing, beliefs about personal COVID risk, and beliefs about the future severity of the pandemic.Petricevich and Teece's (2019) article on the reshaping of globalization raises profound issues on the theory and empirics of international business. The fracture in the world economy between the USA and China is the result of Government policy, but its relationship to rising VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity) elements in globalization is more complex than simple policy changes. This paper suggests that a reappraisal of theory is required, not least because of the eruption of Covid-19, but that internalization theory is the best source of theoretical restructuring in the face of the new empirical realities facing the global economy.We describe the extent to which the world's largest companies (in terms of revenues), achieve sales around the globe, and have been able to penetrate markets outside of their home region. We try to answer the following question Has there been a recent increase in the world's largest firms achieving a global sales orientation, meaning a balanced, global distribution of sales? Rugman &amp; Verbeke (2004) found that few of the 2002 Fortune Global 500 (Fortune Magazine 2002) firms, accounting for over 90% of the world's stock of FDI, actually had a global sales orientation. A majority of multinational enterprises (MNEs) were home-region oriented, suggesting that much work on corporate globalization was normative, rather than accurately describing reality. We present the equivalent data for the 2017 Fortune Global 500 (Fortune Magazine 2017) list. Our data confirm that many large firms are still home-region oriented, but to a lesser extent than before, with 36 MNEs (up from only nine in the 2002 list), now having widely distributed sales across the world's core economic regions. The question arises whether this relative increase in the number of MNEs with a global sales orientation holds any normative value for the firms that presently do not have such a sales distribution.Much of the rising international connectedness of city-regions has developed from MNEs replacing local connections with (superior) international ones. This often creates local disconnectedness that energizes the current populist backlash against MNE activities. We develop approaches to new IB theory, addressing the interdependencies of MNEs and city-regions that we propose as a crucial avenue for future research. We contrast two generic MNE strategies. The first is the traditional one the 'global orchestration' of resources and markets. We argue that it exacerbates local disconnectedness. The second, that we call 'local spawning,' involves engaging with the local entrepreneurial eco-system to create and renew local connectedness, diffusing populist responses. Some MNEs are better able to implement a local spawning strategy, due to industry factors like innovation clock-speed, and firm characteristics like organizational path dependency. Finally, we distinguish between disconnection, which is an outcome of MNE strategy, and global disruptions, like the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, which are primarily stochastic events. Addressing disconnections requires MNEs to re-orient their strategies while dealing with disruptions requires undertaking risk mitigation. We present empirical evidence from city-regions around the world to illustrate our theory.We show the relevance of extant international business (IB) research, and more specifically work on international human resources management (IHRM), to address COVID-19 pandemic challenges. Decision-makers in multinational enterprises have undertaken various types of actions to alleviate the impacts of the pandemic. In most cases these actions relate in some way to managing distance and to rethinking boundaries, whether at the macro- or firm-levels. Managing distance and rethinking boundaries have been the primary focus of much IB research since the IB field was established as a legitimate area of academic inquiry. The pandemic has led to increased cross-border distance problems (e.g., as the result of travel bans and reduced international mobility), and often also to new intra-firm distancing challenges imposed upon previously co-located employees. Prior IHRM research has highlighted the difficulties presented by distance, in terms of employee selection, training, support, health and safety, as well as leadership and virtual collaboration. Much of this thinking is applicable to solve pandemic-related distance challenges. The present, extreme cases of requisite physical distancing need not imply equivalent increases in psychological distance, and also offer firms some insight into the unanticipated benefits of a virtual workforce - a type of workforce that, quite possibly, will influence the 'new normal' of the post-COVID world. Extant IHRM research does offer actionable insight for today, but outstanding knowledge gaps remain. Looking ahead, we offer three domains for future IHRM research managing under uncertainty, facilitating international and even global work, and redefining organizational performance.The demands and consequences of the correctional workplace are well-documented, but researchers have yet to examine the correlates of work stress among a large multi-facility sample of jail officers. We framed our inquiry within the Job Demand-Control-Support model that has guided researchers in parallel studies of work stress among prison officers.
Data on officers' background characteristics, job demands, work-related control or autonomy, support from coworkers or family members, safety risks, and work-related stress were examined across 1380 officers working in 19 jails.
Unreasonable workloads, perceptions of insufficient staff, role problems, less control or autonomy, a lack of support at work or home, and exposure to violence were associated with greater stress among jail officers. https://www.selleckchem.com/products/LBH-589.html Jails with characteristics that threatened order and security-having more inmates per officer and greater levels of inmate violence-had higher levels of stress among officer workforces.
Findings largely support research on work stress among prison officers and may inform efforts to reduce stress and improve quality of life among jail and prison personnel.